Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2013 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (2) TMI 467 - AT - Central ExciseStay Petition - Valuation of goods - Captive consumption - Rule 4 or under Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules, 2000 - AO argued that in respect of clearances of the goods made to the assessee s other unit, the Rule 8 is applicable - Assessee contended that Rule 8 is applicable only when the entire clearances are made to captive consumption and not when there are independent sales at the factory gate - Held that - Since the facts of the case ISPAT INDUSTRIES LTD.(2007 (2) TMI 5 - CESTAT, MUMBAI) are similar to the case decided in favour of assessee. Therefore stay granted
Issues involved: Valuation of goods cleared for captive consumption under Rule 4 or Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules, 2000.
Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Bangalore, delivered by M. Veeraiyan, deals with a dispute regarding the valuation of goods cleared for captive consumption. The appellant was clearing final products for sale as well as captive consumption. The original authority applied Rule 8 of the Valuation Rules, 2000, for clearances of goods made to the appellant's other unit, resulting in a confirmed duty differential of Rs. 1,57,27,920/-, interest, and a penalty. The appellant argued that Rule 8 should only apply when clearances are solely for captive consumption, citing the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in Ispat Industries Ltd. vs. Commissioner of C. Excise. The Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged the similarity of facts with the Ispat Industries Ltd. case. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides on the stay petition, decided to waive the pre-deposit of dues as per the impugned order and stayed the recovery until the appeal's disposal. Additionally, the Tribunal granted the department's application for early hearing of the appeal due to the disputed duty amount exceeding Rs.1.57 crores, scheduling the final hearing for 14.11.2012. This decision reflects a crucial interpretation of the Valuation Rules, specifically regarding the application of Rule 8 in cases involving clearances for captive consumption alongside independent sales at the factory gate. The Tribunal's approach to balancing the interests of both parties by allowing the appeal to proceed while ensuring a stay on recovery showcases a fair and judicious handling of the matter.
|